Shaffique, J.
The petitioner has approached this Court seeking police protection for carrying on business activities in his premises bearing Door No.VI/296D and VI/296E at Thampy's Building at Edayar Junction. According to the petitioner, he is carrying on the business in distribution of home appliances. The second respondent, who is a person in the locality is demanding employment in the petitioner's firm, which the petitioner is not willing to give, against which the second respondent is creating obstruction. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the second respondent is not a pool worker.
2. No materials are produced before this Court to consider whether the demand made by the second respondent is with reference to the loading and unloading work in the premises of the petitioner and whether it is a scheme covered area. If the petitioner's business premises is a scheme covered area, the petitioner can carry on the loading and unloading work through WP(C).26486/14 2 the workers registered in the locality or the workers registered under Rule 26A of the Headload Workers Rules. However, if the second respondent is not a pool worker, he cannot take law into his hands and obstruct the smooth working of the petitioner's business. Though notice was served to the second respondent, there is no appearance on his side.
In the above circumstances, we dispose of the Writ Petition directing the first respondent to ensure that no law and order situation is created by the second respondent in the matter of business carried on by the petitioner.
ASHOK BHUSHAN ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE vgs2/12/14 A.M.SHAFFIQUE JUDGE